dialog re/recent postings…


Richard Moore

bcc: some friends
People still send me items re/global warming. Here’s a response I sent to some of them:
     I first learned about the effect of co2 emissions back in the early ’70s, from a conversation with a researcher from Lawrence Livermore Labs. After that, I cheered for all the underground reports that came out re/warming, and was angry at governments for being in denial. But when died-in-the-wool elite mouthpiece Gore came out with his film, I began to suspect something was rotten in Denmark. 
     Gore’s film ushered in a new ‘media regime’ re/climate change and energy scarcity. We now see a broad consensus developing that includes governments, ordinary people, and the environmentally concerned. The consensus is around an agenda including the following totally incompatible elements:
     – renewable energy (main emphasis: biofuels)
     – more efficient automobiles
     – accelerated petroleum extraction
     – reducing carbon emissions
     – individual life-style changes
     – continuing more or less with business as usual as a society, including economic growth
This turns out to be a very dangerous and counter-productive agenda. Quite clearly, carbon emissions are not going to be meaningfully reduced under an agenda that seeks to make more fuel available, continues with a mass automobile culture, and with economic growth. It’s a fake media agenda, designed to make people think that ‘something is being done’, while in fact a quite different agenda is underway. 
     Just as the Federal Reserve intentionally created the subprime crisis, knowing full well what the consequences would be, they are now intentionally creating a financial bubble in energy futures, a bubble significantly accelerated by the mandating of minimum biofuel content in gasoline. While this is troublesome for the North, the main effect is that energy and food are being priced beyond the means of the South. Put simply, the real agenda is this: “There’s not enough to go around, so we in the rich nations are going to keep what’s left for ourselves, supporting our unsustainable ways a bit longer, and the rest of you can go hang.”
     Although global warming is real, and carbon emissions are entirely too high, a situation has been created where promoting that bandwagon ends up supporting an agenda that will do nothing to reduce carbon emissions, and much to increase global starvation.
     If I were to ‘pick a bandwagon’ that deserves to be supported, with cogent writing and with activism in general, that would have to do with food production and distribution, with an emphasis on organic (non energy-intensive) local production for local consumption.
From: “TK Wilson” <>
Date: August 11, 2008 2:53:33 PM GMT+01:00
To: “Richard Moore” <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Re: Ireland and the Lisbon Treaty


Well, Richard,
I’ve been watching you for a few years now and I think you are hitting your stride. Bravo on a very well written treatise.
Now, if they don’t manage to blow the world out from under us we may just have a chance.
     For what it’s worth, it’s always been my suspiscion that the US wil not be rescued from it’s self imposed quagmire by US nationals (although the quality of many is beyond reproach), but by someone(s) from offshore, at least by way of example. In other words; I don’t think the revolution will start here but I do think it’s underway.

these are very difficult matters to make predictions about. 

you could be right,
From: Phil Toler <>
Date: August 14, 2008 11:47:44 PM GMT+01:00
Subject: Of Russia and Ireland
Greetings Richard,

The previous email regarding Ireland and the link to the article urging a no vote on the EU was both very informative, and I have to think, changed plenty of Irish minds. Thank goodness. As for the US coverage, it was, as usual, pathetic, patronizing, and deceptive. Plenty of blogger-types had the goods, however, and those with eyes and an Internet connection had no trouble connecting the dots. I believe the most convincing point in that article regards the fact that Ministers of Finance cooked the whole idea up is essential in understanding how, as Meyer Amshal Rothschild bluntly put it: “I care not who makes the laws if I control a country’s currency.”
     As for the Russian analysis, spot freaking on. I had a professor of History in 1978 tell my frat chapter, and I arranged for him to speak, that by, or just after the 21st century rang in, the Soviet Union would have collapsed, and a Russia shorn of its buffer states would be decidedly more democratic than the US. The reasoning he presented was precisely as you described as the difference between the two empires MO. Talk about bookends.
     Thanks, Richard, for all your valuable insight and vast research. As we constantly wait for the proverbial other shoe to make noise, your commentary gives those of us who imbibe in it a few steps on the rest.

Hi Phil,
Nice to hear from you, and thanks for sharing these experiences with us. I’m intrigued by this concept, “more democratic than the US”. It’s kind of like math, where we have the concept of dividing by zero… Take this equation,  ( 0 = 0*X = 0*Y ), which is valid for all X and Y, divide by zero, and you get (1 = X = Y) for any value of X and Y. That is to say, if you try to divide by zero, you always get nonsense results. 
Similarly, any discussion that begins with “the US is democratic” can only lead to meaningless results. If we want to compare the political systems of Russia and the US, we might use phrases like, “The US is a privately-owned plutocracy”, and “Russia is a nationalist-minded bureaucracy”, something along those lines. Neither is remotely democratic. 
If we want to introduce some kind of measure of democraticness, that we can use to evaluate any system of government, I suppose “serves the interests of the people” would be a reasonably good candidate. By that measure, I’d say Russia is way ahead of the US. Cuba and Venezuela would be at the top of the list, and the US would be near the bottom.

From: Dion Giles <>
Date: August 11, 2008 3:27:03 PM GMT+01:00
Subject: Re: Russians Push Past Separatist Area


rkm wrote:
Two senior Western officials said that it was unclear whether Russia intended a full invasion of Georgia, but that its aims could go as far as destroying its armed forces or overthrowing Georgia’s pro-Western president, Mikheil Saakashvili.

Now that the Axis has roused the Bear from its cave, it would make perfect sense for the Bear to take that opportunity to clear the nest of vipers the US has installed in Georgia.


Hear flamin’ well hear.
The West didn’t stop at the Kuwait border, the Allies didn’t stop at the German border, how stupid the Russians would be to do differently in Georgia.  Aggression has to be punished and peoples’ right to self determination has to be protected, everywhere, geostrategy or no geostrategy.  The South Ossetians were viciously attacked and aggressors need to be unpunished  wherever they try it on no matter what the ideologues think about essentially lesser priorities.  Dismantling the Georgian armed forces and taking over the oil pipeline would be a reasonable start.

From: JFadiman
Date: August 13, 2008 6:31:54 PM GMT+01:00
Subject: Re: A brief history of Russia & the West


Thank you. It all makes sense once more Horrible as it is, good to know what is actually going on, and a bit of the underlying ewhy.

     The US’s need for an enemy, especially one which it doesn’t have to go to wart with feels right on. 
Oh the billions we can waste armining everyone in the world ot protect us against the great bear.

From: “Chris Shaw” <>
Date: August 13, 2008 6:59:18 PM GMT+01:00
To: “Richard Moore” <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Re: A brief history of Russia & the West
bang on analysis, as always.

From: “Brian Hill” <>
Date: August 13, 2008 7:27:06 PM GMT+01:00
To: “‘Richard Moore'” <•••@••.•••>
Subject: RE: A brief history of Russia & the West
Good Richard – have you sent it to Common Dreams, Altnet, Mother Jones, YES, …?

Hi Brian,
I encourage everyone to forward my material to wherever they think it might be welcome. Such submissions mean more when they come from a third party, rather than an author promoting their own work.

From: Marianne Hoepli <>
Date: August 13, 2008 8:19:52 PM GMT+01:00
To: Richard Moore <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Re: A brief history of Russia & the West

Richard, thanks so much for the informative history lesson! I will pass it on, Marianne


From: “Ayran Dreger” <>
Date: August 13, 2008 9:54:47 PM GMT+01:00
To: “Richard Moore” <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Re: A brief history of Russia & the West
Hi Richard
 Just a very brief note to express my thanks, appreciation and commendation on an excellent exposition of the ‘situation’.
      Hats off to you – or, my preference, big hugs and much love from down under.

vibes received,

From: “Jerold Hubbard” <>
Date: August 13, 2008 11:33:52 PM GMT+01:00
To: “Richard Moore” <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Re: A brief history of Russia & the West
Good job Richard!   I also believe that the International Bankers used the USA’s Intelligence and regime manipulation to drag Russia into a war with Afghanistan!    Russia has the potential to be more independent of the International Banker’s control than any other nation mainly because of it’s fossil fuels as well as land, water, and other valuable minerals.  This makes them a more real threat to the control offered by the international bankiing system!
      Jerold Hubbard, Top Soil Miner alias Grass Roots Farmer

Hi Jerold,
No doubt at all about the Soviet entanglement in Afghanistan – Brzezinsk has bragged about that publicly, how the US created the whole radical muslim ‘jihad’ movement in order to destabilize the USSR. 
From: “Peggy Conroy” <>
Date: August 14, 2008 1:06:24 PM GMT+01:00
To: “Richard Moore” <•••@••.•••>
Subject: suspicions
 Your Russian anaylsis is ok however you’ve left out an important fact concerning this Georgian fiasco. Who just stopped by there on his Olympic trip for a brief pow-wow with some important political leader? Yes, everywhere this moronic W guy goes a bloody mess results…..
Peggy Conroy
West Chazy, NY

Hi Peggy,
Most likely he assured them of US military assistance if the Russians crossed into Georgia. With his ‘humanitarian contingent’, he’s got ‘plausible deniability’ re/ bald-faced lying. 


subscribe mailto:
old archives: 
Moderator: •••@••.•••  (comments welcome)